Posts Tagged ‘sarah palin’

Remember how the left and the media insisted that Sarah Palin was “lying” about death panels but suddenly decided to drop them?

Just 5 days ago Rep Blumenauer’s (D-Shhhh) memo leaked that they were back in but we don’t want to talk about it.

Well now they are out again:

The Obama administration, reversing course, will revise a Medicare regulation to delete references to end-of-life planning as part of the annual physical examinations covered under the new health care law, administration officials said Tuesday.

The move is an abrupt shift, coming just days after the new policy took effect on Jan. 1.

The article in the Times mentions Palin specifically:

Sarah Palin, the 2008 Republican vice-presidential candidate, said in the summer of 2009 that “Obama’s death panel” would decide who was worthy of health care. Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader who is to become speaker on Wednesday, said the provision could be a step “down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.”

…but somehow omits Rep Blumenauer’s (D-Shhhh) memo and the fallout thereof. The Hill manages to bring it up while still calling it a “lie”.

But you can’t blame the times, with 43 candidates she endorsed being sworn in today perhaps Palin and Boehner are the story today.

but the contrast is stunning. First Juan Williams

“‘There’s nobody out there, except for Sarah Palin, who can absolutely dominate the stage, and she can’t stand on the intellectual stage with Obama,’ Williams said.

“Palin, like Williams, is a Fox News contributor. And when Williams was fired by National Public Radio this year after saying he felt nervous when he sees Muslims on an airplane, Palin was among the conservative voices defending him.”

Allahpundit being allahpundit further quotes Williams

I think most Republicans now in the polls question whether or not she has the credibility to be president,’

There is just one problem with this line of thinking…the facts as Ian Lazaran notes:

Has any other potential Republican presidential candidate other than Palin been able to force the New York Times to concede that he or she put Obama on the defensive? Has any other potential Republican presidential candidate other than Palin destroyed a liberal policy to such an extent that the Democrat Party is afraid to publicize what it is doing and can only get it implemented through channels outside of the legislative arena?

And how many times has Sarah Palin led from the front while other GOP candidates have waited in the wings afraid to engage? This is what a leader does.

As for polls, forgetting that they are a snapshot in time people are forgetting that a presidential primary is in the works and the candidates running not named Palin need their supporters to attack her since they don’t dare to so on their own. There are plenty in the GOP how see Palin as a threat to their prerogatives and their power and will be happy to help the media along in trying to destroy her as long as they are not seen as doing so.

In addition to the other problems that the establishment has with Sarah Palin. She also calls out their religious “personally believes” nonsense. It so rattled Kathleen Kennedy Townsend As Patrick O’Hannigan reports, had to respond:

Washington Post editors gave Townsend 1,500 words to defend her uncle’s attempt to compartmentalize his faith, but the “coulda been a contender” lament that they got for their trouble only exposed Townsend as another palooka in a family full of them.

Townsend asserts that she gave America by Heart a careful reading, from which she came away sure that Palin supports an unconstitutional religious test for public office. Inconveniently, we have to take Townsend’s word for that, because Palin actually says no such thing: the closest she gets is to express disappointment at John F. Kennedy’s failure to reconcile his “private faith and public role,” and his unwillingness to tell fellow countrymen “how his faith had enriched him.”

Well who knows faith better, a non-Catholic like Palin or a member of as far as the media is concerning the Catholic family of America? Let’s ask archbishop Chaput:

Speaking this past spring at Houston Baptist University, Archbishop Chaput noted that “Real Christian faith is always personal, but it’s never private.” That was one of the things about which John F. Kennedy was mistaken. Moreover, said Chaput, Kennedy’s remarks in Houston “profoundly undermined the place not just of Catholics, but of all religious believers, in America’s public life and political conversation.” And “Today, half a century later, we’re paying for the damage.”

In other words, Sarah Palin’s criticism of the Kennedy approach to faith accords substantially with criticisms offered by another Christian of unquestioned acumen. Not only that, but Chaput came loaded for bear, quoting another scholar to buttress the point that John F. Kennedy “secularized the American presidency in order to win it.”

But what does he know? He’s only an Archbishop.

That’s why they fear Palin she and the tea parties that support her, they threaten their entire way of life and force them to face realities beyond it.

Update: Cleaned up the first sentence and added quotes. Let me clarify what “Personally Believes” stuff means. It is when a pols says he “personally believes” something but votes a different way due to a separation between their religious belief and their public life. This is nonsense since we are the sum of our beliefs and if we are willing to turn them off like a light switch then we are hollow.

SISU points out the following message from Washington concerning Sarah Palin:

“Seventy-nine percent of Washington elites believe Palin is a ‘negative influence in national politics’ while just 15 percent find her to be ‘a breath of fresh air,'” according to a new Politico poll that defines said elites as “those who live within the D.C. metro area, earn more than $75,000 per year, have at least a college degree and are involved in the political process or policymaking.”

Of course the beltway consider her a negative influence, she has helped lead a peasant’s revolt that threatens their ability to feed at the public though.

And when you look at the activity going on in the lame duck it speaks volumes concerning what people really think (not withstanding reminders that some conservative pundits who now worship at the altar of Ronald Reagan thought him a dunce in the past)

Let’s face it, if they didn’t think the culture of Washington was about to change they wouldn’t bother to be forcing all of the last-minute stuff that they are now. They would know that in the past republican congresses were easily co-oped and they would be able to make deals to keep their own prerogatives flowing.

Yet after a single election they are risking all. Why? I think it’s because their own internals on Sarah Palin and the tea party show she is a lot more popular than pseudo polls (and I guarantee that this poll will be a morning joe topic today to Mika’s delight, outlier or no) pretend she is and they are afraid of actual systemic change.

They are aware that before being picked as McCain’s running mate interviews not out to get her revealed her to be a bright and thoughtful woman and leader. Some people more interested in the party circuit than in actual conservatism hit her because they know her record in opposing Obama, taking substantial policy positions when others hang back, but to do so is to face rejection in Washington.

What’s worse snark not withstanding she doesn’t fear the media, in fact she considers them irrelevant.

The left will always tell you who they are afraid of, and the actions of this congress right now tell me that both the left and establishment republicans are afraid that Sarah Palin can win.

They are wise to believe so